Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32957400›Full record

SynthesisMedicine2020

Comparative efficacy and safety of mycophenolate mofetil and cyclophosphamide in the induction treatment of lupus nephritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Yue-Peng Jiang, Xiao-Xuan Zhao, Rong-Rong Chen, Zheng-Hao Xu, Cheng-Ping Wen, Jie Yu

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Narra J · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Lupus Vasculitis: An Overview.Biomedicines · 2021
    Review
  13. COVID-19 in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: lessons learned from the inflammatory disease.Translational research : the journal of laboratory and clinical medicine · 2021
    Review
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yue-Peng JiangCollege of Basic Medical Science, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou.ORCID 0000-0002-3659-9196
Xiao-Xuan ZhaoHeilongjiang University of Chinese Medicine, Harbin, China.
Rong-Rong ChenCollege of Basic Medical Science, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou.
Zheng-Hao XuCollege of Basic Medical Science, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou.
Cheng-Ping WenCollege of Basic Medical Science, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou.
Jie YuCollege of Basic Medical Science, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou.ORCID 0000-0002-6768-7236
Zhejiang Chinese Medical University · CNHeilongjiang University of Chinese Medicine · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLupus nephritis (LN) remains a predominant cause of morbidity and mortality in SLE. Here we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the induction treatment with mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and cyclophosphamide (CYC) for LN.

methodsRelevant literature was searched by computer from the establishment of the database to November 2019. A meta-analysis was conducted to analysis the efficacy and safety between mycophenolate mofetil and cyclophosphamide as induction therapy in LN patients. The primary end-point was response to urine protein, serum creatinine (Scr) and serum complement C3, and the secondary end-points were complete remission and adverse reactions.

resultsEighteen articles were selected for the final meta-analysis, involving 1989 patients with LN, of which the renal biopsy result could be classified into class III-V according to the standards of WHO/ISN. The results revealed that MMF was superior to CYC in increasing the level of serum complement C3 [SMD = 0.475, 95%CI (0.230-0.719)] and complete remission [RR = 1.231, 95%CI (1.055-1.437)]. Furthermore, the subgroup analysis showed that it was in Asian patients, rather than in Caucasian patients, that CYC exerted a better effect on lowering the level of urine protein (UPRO) than MMF [SMD = 0.405, 95%CI (0.081-0.730)]. Besides, when the initial UPRO level was less than 4 g/day, the effect of CYC was better than MMF [SMD = 0.303, 95%CI (0.014-0.591)]. There was no significant difference between MMF and CYC in improving Scr [SMD = 0.090, 95%CI (-0.060-0.239)]. When it came to the comparison of safety between MMF and CYC, the meta-analysis showed that MMF was superior to CYC in decreasing infection in Caucasian patients [RR = 0.727, 95%CI (0.532-0.993)], reducing the risk of leukopenia and menstrual abnormalities in Asian patients and lowering the frequency of gastrointestinal symptoms [RR = 0.639, 95%CI (0.564-0.724)], independent of race.

conclusionsMMF precedes CYC in improving serum complement C3 and complete remission regardless of race, as well as shows fewer adverse drug reactions in the induction treatment of LN belonging to type III-V. But for Asian patients or those initial UPRO levels are less than 4 g/day, CYC may be superior to MMF.

Indexed as

AdultCyclophosphamideFemaleHumansLupus NephritisMaleMycophenolic AcidRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRemission InductionCyclophosphamideMycophenolic Acid

Identifiers

PMID32957400
PMCPMC7505394
OpenAlexW3087727402

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.